"To the Editor of the _Sun_.
"30, Parkfield Street, Islington.
"February 16th, 1853.
"Sir,--I regret that I am a stranger to you, but I have a confidence that your sense of "fair play" will influence you to insert the accompanying letter in your journal of to-morrow. I need hardly add that the facts which it states have been drawn from an authentic source.
"With high respect, sir,
"I am, etc,
"Mayne Reid."
"To the Editor of _The Times_.
"Sir,--In your journal of the 10th inst. appears a telegraphic dispatch announcing an insurrection in Milan; and underneath, in the same column, a doc.u.ment which you state "purports to be from Kossuth," and to which is appended the name of that gentleman.
"Now, sir, M. Kossuth either did write that doc.u.ment, or he did not. If he did, and you have published it without his authorisation, you have committed, by all the laws of honour in this land, a dishonourable act.
If he did not write it, you have committed, by the laws of justice in this land, a criminal act. I charge you with the committal of both.
You are guilty of the latter; and the latter, like a parenthesis, embraces the former.
"You have published that doc.u.ment without any authorisation from the man whose name is subscribed to it; and upon the day following, in an additional article, you have declared its authenticity, as a proclamation addressed by M. Kossuth, from Bayswater, for the purpose of engaging the Lombard and Hungarian patriots in the late insurrection at Milan.
"As such, sir, in the name of M. Kossuth, _I disavow the doc.u.ment. I p.r.o.nounce it to be a forgery_.
"It remains with M. Kossuth to bring you before the bar of the law. It has become my duty to arraign you before the tribunal of public opinion.
"I charge you, then, with having given utterance to a forged doc.u.ment, which was calculated to reflect with a d.a.m.ning influence upon the fame of its reputed author. Such conduct is in any case culpable. In yours it is inexcusable, since you daily tell us that "whatever is intended for insertion must be authenticated by the name and address of the writer."
"But this is not all, sir. In the editorial referred to, you take occasion to speak of the man whose name has been thus abused in a tirade of vengeful invective, whose epithets I, as a gentleman, shall not condescend to reproduce.
"Calling the false proclamation "bombastic fustian," you have charged M.
Kossuth with aiding to incite the late insurrection in Milan, and thereby causing the wanton shedding of blood--of "hallooing on the wretched victims to certain destruction, while he himself enjoys the most perfect personal security under the guardianship of British law."
"This is a serious charge, and, if not true, a slander which, by the mildest construction, must be termed most cruel and atrocious. _It is not true_. It is a slander, and I feel confident that all who read will p.r.o.nounce it, as I have done, cruel and atrocious.
"With regard to its first clause, I here affirm that M. Kossuth had not only no part in inciting the Italians to a revolution at this time; but, that up to the latest moment, he opposed such an ill-judged and premature movement with all the might of his counsel. He had weighty reasons for so doing. Perhaps you, sir, may know what these "weighty reasons" are; but whether you do or not, I am not going to declare them for the benefit of Austrian ears. This is not the question now, but your charge is; to which I oppose the affirmation that it is _not true_.
With regard to the latter clause of your quoted a.s.sertion, I have thus to answer; that the moment in which M. Kossuth received the news of the insurrection in Milan--and which came upon him as unexpectedly as upon any man in England--upon that moment he hurried to make preparation for his departure to the scene of action. Although filled with a prophetic apprehension that the affair would turn out to be an _emeute_, and not a national revolution, he, nevertheless, resolved to fling his body into the struggle. I, who was to have had the honour of sharing his dangers, can bear testimony to the zeal with which he was hurrying to face them, when he was frustrated by the news that the insurrection was crushed.
Were I to detail, as I may one day be called upon to do, the sacrifices which he made to effect that object, the slanders, sir, which you have uttered against him would recoil still more bitterly upon yourself. For the present I content myself with the a.s.sertion of the fact; but should you render it necessary I am ready with the proofs.
"But no such explanation was needed to shield Louis Kossuth from your unmanly accusation. Shall I recall a circ.u.mstance in the life of that heroic man to refute you? You, sir, must know it well. It has been recorded in the columns, and engraven in the tablets, of history. In August, 1849, upon the banks of the Danube stood Louis Kossuth. On one side was the avenging Austrian, thirsting for his blood; on the other his weak and wavering protector, who had declared that unless he-- Kossuth--and his a.s.sociates would consent to abandon the religion of their fathers they must be yielded up, to what? On the part of Kossuth, to death--certain death--upon the ignominious scaffold. In this perilous crisis, others, less compromised, accepted life upon the terms proposed. What did Kossuth, when it came to his turn to speak? He uttered these words of glory: "Death, death upon the scaffold, in preference to such terms for life! Accursed be the tongue that could make to me such an infamous proposal."
"In such language, at such a time, there is no "bombastic fustian." I could believe that there were men incapable of comprehending the sublime courage, the heroic virtue of such an act; but I did not believe there existed a man in all England who would have the effrontery--the positive and palpable meanness--to stigmatise the hero of that act with a charge of cowardice.
"Such, sir, are the facts connected with this affair. I may at some future time treat you to a few opinions, and review more copiously the history of your conduct in relation to M. Kossuth. Meanwhile, I leave you to purify your soiled escutcheon as you best may.
"I am, sir, yours obediently,
"Mayne Reid.
"February 15th.
"P.S.--February 16th. Sir,--In your journal of this morning, instead of publishing the above letter, you have noticed it in a short paragraph, worthy of the pen that would malign a patriot. But do not imagine that you are to escape thus easily from the unpleasant position in which you have placed yourself. In this country the character of a gentleman, though he be a stranger, is not to be wantonly a.s.sailed with impunity, and you, sir, shall be as amenable to the laws of honour and justice as the meanest citizen in the land.
"You say, in relation to your pseudo proclamation, that you "had good reason for believing it to be genuine, and shall certainly not discredit it without better authority than that of Mayne Reid."
"If you had no better authority for publishing it than what is implied by the tenor of the above paragraph, I fancy you will have some difficulty in explaining to your readers why you published it at all, and to your countrymen why--_so long as a doubt existed in your mind as to its genuineness_--you took advantage of the sentiments expressed by it to defame the character of its reputed author. You take occasion to characterise my letter as "absurdly bombastic language." It is before the public as above. Let them be the judges; and the only favour I should ask of them would be, to read your editorial article upon the same subject. Having given yours a prior perusal, I feel satisfied that their ears will not be so delicately attuned as to be jarred by the "absurdly bombastic" of mine.
""Bombastic" seems to be a favourite phrase with you, and for the style itself no writer in England is more accustomed to its usage than that mythical personage--the editor of _The Times_.
"Your sneer at the "authority of Mayne Reid," is equally characteristic.
It is true I am but a plain gentleman, who make my living, like yourself, by literature. But I did not calculate upon the statement of a plain gentleman having any weight with you. In my letter I offered you full proof of my a.s.sertions. You do not seem inclined to call them forth.
"And now, sir, one word more. If you flatter yourself that by means of bold swagger and personal invective you can cover your misdeeds, you are sadly mistaken. You may insult the understanding of Englishmen, as you repeatedly do, with your wordy sophistry, and mystify the ma.s.ses, who "run as they read." I, sir, have a higher faith in the intelligence of my countrymen, and a full confidence that the majority of them have heads clear enough to understand, and hearts pure enough to repudiate, an unprovoked and unproven slander.
"I am, sir, etc,
"Mayne Reid."
In the _Morning Advertiser_ of February 19th, 1853, appeared the following:
"M. Kossuth and "The Times."
"To the Editor of the _Morning Advertiser_.
"Sir,
"Your kindness in giving a place in your widely circulated journal to my former communication in relation to M. Kossuth leads me to hope that you will also publish the inclosed doc.u.ment.
"I am, sir,
"With high respect,
"Truly yours,
"Mayne Reid.
"301, Parkfield Street, February 17th."
"To the Editor of _The Times_.
"Sir,
"You have refused to disavow the pseudo proclamation which you published over the name of M. Kossuth, _without better authority than that of Mayne Reid_. Perhaps you will be satisfied with the authority of the gentleman whose name is in autograph appended to the communication I now inclose you.